BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND SKILLS

Higher Education Regulatory Reforms

David Willetts: Today I am announcing reforms to how higher education in England is regulated.
	The White Paper “Students at the Heart of the System”, published in 2011, set out a plan to transform higher education, to ensure it was placed on a sustainable footing, to deliver a better student experience, to promote social mobility and widen participation, and to create a more responsive higher education sector in which funding follows the decisions of learners and where successful institutions will thrive. The funding reforms, which rebalanced funding from grants to tuition fees, came into effect in the 2012-13 academic year. The regulation of higher education needs to be adjusted to reflect these reforms.
	The reformed regulatory system for higher education I am announcing today has been developed by the Higher Education Funding Council for England and the Student Loans Company through the Regulatory Partnership Group, working with the Government. The reformed regulatory system ensures accountability for public funding, protects the collective student interest, gives priority to quality improvement, safeguards institutional autonomy, and sustains the reputation of English higher education.
	The higher education sector has a long tradition of successful independent regulation and also regulation shared between Government and the sector. The funding council’s statutory independence is a key feature of this system. The funding council’s independence has helped to sustain academic freedom and institutional autonomy, features that are critical to the continued success and international standing of English higher education. In adjusting the regulatory framework this successful independent regulation has been protected as a vital national asset.
	The funding council and the loan company do not work alone and have developed effective relationships with other bodies including the Quality Assurance Agency, the Office for Fair Access, the Office of the Independent Adjudicator, the Higher Education Statistics Agency, and the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service.
	As part of the reforms, the working of the regulatory system will be set out in an operating framework which the funding council will be publishing shortly. The framework will be instantly recognisable to many in the sector as much remains largely unchanged. It affirms the value of institutional autonomy and sets out transparently the accountability and regulatory requirements that protect the student interest and public investment.
	HEFCE will consult the sector on a new financial memorandum that will support the operating framework incorporating necessary changes that the reforms and
	new priorities demand. The framework incorporates changes which have been a result of separate consultations by Government, the funding council, and the Quality Assurance Agency.
	Flowing from the White Paper “Students at the Heart of the System” and the funding reforms, there are a number of new or reformed elements. These reforms are:
	Placing the funding council in an oversight and co-ordination role;
	Establishing a register of higher education provision;
	Introducing a statement of higher education institutions (HEI) designation conditions;
	Updating the financial memorandum;
	Reforming student number controls;
	A new designation system for alternative providers;
	A student number control system for alternative providers; and,
	A designation resolution process.
	The first reform is placing the funding council in an oversight and co-ordination role. This is a complex, but highly necessary function that will ensure proportionate regulation across all higher education providers and co-ordinate the regulatory activity of a number of bodies that are variously constituted as Government agencies and independent bodies. It will involve the funding council:
	Acting as registrar;
	Working with higher education providers, agencies, representative bodies and the NUS, to monitor systematically observance of the conditions associated with operating in the system, with a focus on protecting the collective student interest;
	Taking a lead in working with partners to identify and address issues within higher education providers and take appropriate remedial action; and,
	Monitoring the ongoing appropriateness of the regulatory system, changes in the broader context, and new risks as they emerge.
	Next, I have asked the funding council to establish a register of higher education provision. Good, high-quality, timely, and reliable information is key to enabling students to make the right decisions on their education. It is also important that those institutions that fulfil requirements that provide confidence to students and the public are appropriately recognised.
	The register of higher education provision will therefore act as a consumer safeguard. The register will give information on:
	The constitutional/organisational status of each higher education provider;
	How the higher education provider is funded; and,
	What the provider is committed to do—this might include, but not be limited to, provision of information, quality requirements, financial management, governance, complaints handling, and fair access.
	The third reform is introducing a statement of HEI designation conditions. Regulatory requirements on higher education institutions are currently primarily applied through the funding council’s financial memorandum which applies conditions to grant funding and establishes clear accountability for such funding. This arrangement will continue. From academic year 2014-15 onwards it is my intention that similar conditions will also apply to HEI automatic course designation for student support. This ensures that the rebalancing of funding from grants
	to tuition fees does not diminish the effectiveness of the current regulatory regime and the confidence this provides to students and the public. It also means the regulatory burden is minimised as no further requirements are placed on institutions than currently exist.
	To make this change I will be updating the education (student support) regulations. BIS will discuss the details of the amendment and its implementation in practice with representatives of the higher education sector. Importantly, once the regulations have been made, BIS intends to delegate to the funding council the function of designation of courses at higher education institutions for student support purposes. This continues the existing protections that institutions enjoy through the funding council being at arm’s length from Government.
	Over the next academic year the funding council will be consulting on an updated version of the financial memorandum, informed by extensive discussions the council has already held with higher education representatives and other interested bodies. I understand that the proposed changes are limited, with the most significant issue for consultation being new arrangements to manage the risks around financial commitments. These arrangements are important for sustaining confidence in universities in the capital markets.
	The funding council is already consulting on reforming the student number control system for HEI. While continuing to exercise prudent control of the overall higher education budget, student choice is being increased through our tariff policy and the consultation on a flexibility margin for 2014-15. The tariff threshold has been reduced to ABB or equivalent from 2013-14 which frees around one third of places from number controls. These policies will allow more students to study at their first choice institution.
	Alternative providers are an important part of increasing choice for students. The sixth reform is to the designation system for alternative providers. Specific course designation at alternative providers allows eligible English-domiciled students on designated courses to access loans and grants from the Student Loans Company—with the maximum fee loan being £6,000 per annum. This widens student choice and strengthens the forces that drive innovation.
	At the same time the Government are committed to ensuring that there are robust processes in place to protect the interest of students, the reputation of UK higher education, and the public investment. Following a Government consultation, existing and new alternative providers will now have to meet stronger requirements on quality assurance, financial sustainability, and good governance. We will also expect that the collective student interest is served through this process.
	To accompany the strengthening of specific course designation for alternative providers we are also planning to introduce a system of student number controls for alternative providers. This will be introduced from academic year 2014-15.
	Finally in the highly unlikely event that a higher education institution or alternative provider does not meet the conditions of course designation in respect of student support funding there is a risk that the course will no longer remain designated. To protect the students at an institution where this occurs I have asked the funding council working with Government and the
	wider sector to look at options for developing a designation resolution process. This should place the interests of students at the centre of the process.
	Taken as a whole these eight higher education regulatory reforms constitute a package of measures, alongside the previous rebalancing of funding, to ensure higher education is placed on a sustainable footing, that students have a better experience, to promote social mobility and widen participation, and to create a more responsive higher education sector in which funding follows the decisions of learners and where successful institutions will thrive.
	I am today placing copies of my letter to the funding council in the Libraries of both Houses. I am also placing copies of the operating framework in the Libraries of both Houses.

Professional and Business Services Industrial Strategy

Vincent Cable: The Government have today published “Growth is Our Business: A Strategy for Professional and Business Services”.
	Last September I set out our new industrial strategy, and how we would work with business to stimulate economic growth and create jobs. Today’s strategy for tradable, knowledge-intensive professional and business services (PBS) is the latest in a series which focuses on key parts of our economy. It has been produced by Government in partnership with the Professional and Business Services Council and with others from across the sector.
	The UK’s PBS sector comprises a range of high-skilled services, such as accountancy, legal, marketing/corporate communications, management and engineering consultancy services, it is significant in scale. It generated 11% of UK gross value added in 2011 and provided nearly 12% of UK employment(1). It supports change and innovation right across our economy. The sector is also a global success story. Its exports represented £47 billion in 2011(2), with a trade surplus of £19 billion—a third of the UK’s total services sector surplus(3).
	This strategy identifies several areas for action, including two that are key to ensuring the future success of the sector. These are, first, increasing access to the high-level skills demanded by client-focused professional firms and, secondly, increasing PBS exports to emerging markets. The strategy sets out plans for both these priorities:
	The industry will partner with Government to work towards trebling within five years the numbers of high apprenticeships across PBS. We aim to create new non-graduate routes into the sector. PBS firms will also work with schools to highlight the opportunities available.
	Government and industry will also partner on a new trade and investment strategy. A new network of senior PBS business representatives will be set up to champion UK capabilities overseas.
	I will be placing copies of the strategy document in the Libraries of both Houses.
	(1) ONS national accounts data and BIS calculations
	(2) ONS Pink Book
	(3) OECD trade in services data

Regional Growth Fund

Michael Fallon: Today my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister will announce that 102 projects and programmes have been awarded a total of £506 million in round 4 of the regional growth fund (RGF). This additional support for the private sector in England will help ensure that RGF money is now helping an increasing number of companies to invest in long-term job creation schemes in communities that need private investment. I am publishing a list of all 102 projects and programmes that have been selected for support in round 4, at annex A.
	In autumn statement 2012 the Government announced that £350 million would be made available for round 4 of the RGF, including £140 million of recycled funds from previous rounds. Such was the high quality of the bids received that Ministers have decided to use an additional £156 million of recycled funds in order to bring the total amount of RGF awarded in round 4 up to £506 million.
	In round 4, £314 million will go directly to the private sector, comprising 60 awards to companies and 12 private sector-run RGF programmes. A total of £192 million has been awarded to 30 other programme beneficiaries such as local authorities and local enterprise partnerships to support local growth priorities in their areas.
	This means that since the start of the RGF over £1 billion has been made available to SMEs in England through RGF-supported programmes. Further details on how the RGF helps support SMEs can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/regional-growth-fund-a-guide-for-small-and-medium-enterprises-smes.
	The £2.6 billion of support awarded across the first four rounds of the RGF will help to lever an additional £14.7 billion of private sector money, ensuring a sizeable combined investment by the Government and companies in communities throughout England between 2011 and 2024. This investment will create and safeguard 550,000 jobs across England. The announcement on 26 June 2013 by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer of a further £600 million for the RGF is testament that the RGF will continue to help secure private sector investment and job creation plans for many years to come.
	RGF Annual Monitoring Report 2013
	In addition, today the Government will publish the first RGF annual monitoring report. The report details the progress made by the 239 projects and programmes selected in RGF rounds 1 and 2 from the day they were chosen for support through to 31 March 2013.
	The report shows that progress on directly monitored job delivery in rounds 1 and 2 to date is on target, with 32,000 directly monitored jobs created and safeguarded up to 31 March 2013. The total employment impact, both directly monitored and advised jobs, is estimated at 58,600 jobs—20% of the overall job total committed to by the 197 round 1 and 2 beneficiaries that are progressing.
	The combined RGF and private sector investment was £1.2 billion at 31 March 2013, including support to over 1,700 SMEs.
	Copies of the RGF annual monitoring report 2013 have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
	Annex A—List of Selected Bidders in Round 4
	East Midlands
	UK Stem Cell Provision (Anthony Nolan)
	Bifrangi UK Ltd
	Chinook Sciences Ltd
	“Global Derbyshire” Small Business Support Programme (Derbyshire County Council—Programme)
	Dynex Semiconductor Ltd
	Fairline Boats Ltd
	Frontier Agriculture Ltd (Programme)
	Leicester and Leicestershire Enterprise Partnership Accelerating Prosperity Programme (Leicester City Council—Programme)
	Northamptonshire Enterprise Partnership (Programme)
	Oclaro Technology Ltd
	Toyota Motor Manufacturing (UK) Ltd
	The Lincoln Growth Fund (University of Lincoln—Programme)
	VF Northern Europe Ltd
	East of England, South East
	Eastern England Agri-Tech Growth Initiative (Cambridgeshire County Council—Programme)
	Coast to Capital City High Growth and Innovation Fund (Coast to Capital LEP—Programme)
	Cummins Power Generation Ltd (CPG)
	e2v Technologies (UK) Ltd
	East Sussex Invest (East Sussex County Council—Programme)
	Element Six Ltd
	Fianium Ltd
	GE Aviation Systems
	Harwell Science and Innovation Campus GP
	SUCCESS—Southeast Urban Coast Creative Enterprise Support Scheme (Hastings Borough Council—Programme)
	Escalate—the Innovation and Growth Fund (Kent County Council—Programme)
	Portsmouth/Southampton (Programme)
	STRUCTeam Ltd
	New Anglia Growing Business Fund (Suffolk County Council—Programme)
	TAG Farnborough Airport Ltd
	The Oxford Trust/Science Oxford
	SPI Lasers UK Ltd
	North East
	Air Fuel Synthesis Ltd/Crane Services (UK) Ltd
	JDR Cable Systems Ltd
	JDR Enterprises Ltd
	Molplex Ltd
	NET Power Europe
	Tees Valley Innovation and Skills Growth Hub (Stockton Borough Council—Programme)
	Sunderland City Deal Infrastructure Development (Sunderland City Council—Programme)
	Bringing Finance to Businesses in the North East (Sunderland City Council—Programme)
	Thomas Swan and Co. Ltd
	Tinsley Special Products Ltd
	North West
	Accelerating Business Growth PLUS (Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council—Programme)
	Bright Future Software Ltd
	Unleashing Cumbria’s Potential (Cumbria County Council—Programme)
	Cygnet Group Ltd
	EA Technology Ltd
	Turning Discovery Science and Knowledge into Jobs and Growth (GM Local Enterprise Partnership—Programme)
	Helical Technology Ltd
	Liverpool City Region Small Business Support Fund (Liverpool City Region LEP—Programme)
	N Brown Group Plc (Programme)
	Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics Ltd
	Patterson and Rothwell Ltd
	Redx Pharma Ltd
	Sidcot Investments Ltd
	St Helens Jobs and Growth Fund (St Helens Chamber—Programme)
	Tratos Ltd
	Unilever UK Central Resources Ltd
	Catalyst for Growth (University of Chester—Programme)
	Vix Technology (UK) Ltd
	South West
	AgustaWestland Ltd
	Atlantic Inertial Systems Ltd
	Avanti Communications Group plc
	Cooper Tire and Rubber Company Europe Ltd
	Johnson Matthey Fuel Cells Ltd (JMFC)
	Marine Current Turbines Ltd
	GAIN Growth Fund Plus (Plymouth City Council—Programme)
	Trackwise Designs Ltd
	Innovation for Growth Programme (University of the West of England—Programme)
	West Midlands
	GBS Mezzanine Funding Programme (Birmingham City Council—Programme)
	Coventry and Warwickshire Business Finance (Coventry and Warwickshire LEP—Programme)
	The Marches and Worcestershire Redundant Building Grant Programme (Herefordshire Council—Programme)
	Jaguar Land Rover Ltd
	Jaguar Land Rover Ltd
	Jaguar Land Rover Ltd
	King Automotive Systems Ltd
	Malvern Instruments Ltd
	NVC Lighting Ltd
	Robinson Brothers Ltd
	Growing Priority Sectors in the Black Country (Sandwell MBC—Programme)
	Innovative Growth in Stoke on Trent and Staffordshire (Stoke on Trent City Council—Programme)
	Tata Steel UK Ltd
	TRW Automotive—College Road
	Wade Ceramics Ltd
	Worcestershire Expansion Fund (Worcestershire County Council—Programme)
	Yorkshire and the Humber
	Beatson Clark Ltd
	Paull Strategic Employment Site: Capturing Siemens Tier 1 Suppliers (East Riding of Yorkshire Council)
	Harrison Spinks Beds Ltd
	The enhanced Business Growth Programme (Leeds City Region LEP—Programme)
	Developing the UK’s Leading Food Manufacturing Cluster in Greater Lincolnshire (North East Lincolnshire Council—Programme)
	Optare Plc
	Really Useful Products Ltd
	Unlocking (more) Business Investment (Sheffield Council—Programme)
	Silkstone Finance Ltd
	Centre for Innovation in Rail (University of Huddersfield)
	York, North Yorkshire and East Riding Business Grant Programme
	Nationwide
	Tooling Loan Fund (Birmingham)
	Community Development Finance Association
	Creative England
	Deutsche Leasing UK Ltd
	Five Arrows Leasing Group Ltd (FALG)
	HSBC
	Wave 2 City Deals Growth Hubs
	RBS

COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Remembering Srebrenica

Eric Pickles: My noble Friend the Senior Minister of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Minister for Faith and Communities at the Department for Communities and Local Government (Baroness Warsi) has made the following written ministerial statement:
	I wish to inform the House that the Department for Communities and Local Government is funding “Remembering Srebrenica” (http://www.srebrenica.org.uk), an initiative dedicated to commemorating and honouring the victims of Srebrenica and teaching future generations about the consequences of hatred.
	In July 1995, the Bosnian town of Srebrenica was overrun and captured by Bosnian Serb forces and Serbian paramilitaries commanded by General Ratko Mladic, despite having been declared a UN safe area. More than 8,000 Bosnian Muslim men and boys were systematically murdered and buried in mass graves in actions that the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and International Court of Justice have determined constitute genocide.
	In recognition of this, the Government are providing £170,000 to the community-led “Remembering Srebrenica” initiative in its first year of operation. This will fund an online educational archive, a commemoration event on 11 July 2013 and a series of visits from local communities to Srebrenica.
	I wish to express my thanks to my right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr William Hague), for the support and co-operation that his Department has provided.
	Srebrenica represents a catastrophic collective international failure to protect civilians. Commemorating the event will teach future generations about the devastating consequences of hatred on our doorstep.

DEFENCE

Recruitment

Mark Francois: There has been a long tradition of Commonwealth citizens serving in the British armed forces and most recently on operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. We continue to value their service which provides an important contribution in defending the UK at home and abroad.
	In order to deliver the future structure of the armed forces under the requirements of the strategic defence and security review, we are already reducing their size by adjusting our recruit intake and making some redundancies. The long-standing five-year UK residency requirement for Commonwealth citizens to join the armed forces was waived in 1998. We have reviewed the Commonwealth recruitment rules and, with effect from 11 July, we will reintroduce the five-years’ residency requirement in the UK for future new recruits from Commonwealth countries. In addition, non-British recruits to the reserves will be required to have indefinite leave to remain in the UK in order to fulfil their reservist commitment. This will also create consistency in the recruitment practices of all three services.
	This will not affect personnel already serving, or on recruitment, from the Republic of Ireland or for the Brigade of Gurkhas. We are confident that we will still be able to meet our recruitment targets. We will honour our commitments to those Commonwealth recruits in the pipeline who have already been offered a job or a training place and we will also continue to process the applications for those who have already been offered a place at an assessment centre by the Army or a psychometric test by the Navy or the RAF.

Service Complaints Commissioner's Fifth Annual Report

Mark Francois: I am pleased to lay before Parliament today the Ministry of Defence (MOD) response to the Service Complaints Commissioner’s (SCC) fifth annual report on the fairness, effectiveness and efficiency of the service complaints system.
	The response sets out how the MOD proposes to address the recommendations made in the commissioner’s report, against the background of the progress made by the services in 2012, and the further changes to the complaints system that were introduced in January 2013. The MOD remains committed to ensuring that the service complaints process is as fair, effective and efficient as it can be.
	In that context, I am pleased to inform the House that discussions with the Service Complaints Commissioner, regarding reform of the service complaints system, are proceeding well. We hope to have more to say on this subject in the autumn.

ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE

Energy Savings Opportunity Scheme

Gregory Barker: The Government are today publishing their proposals for an energy savings opportunity scheme (ESOS) for public consultation.
	The new scheme will enable companies to identify opportunities to save money on energy bills through improved energy efficiency and could benefit the UK by £1.9 billion.
	Under the scheme, which is being developed as part of the UK’s implementation of the EU energy efficiency directive, large enterprises will be required to undertake ESOS assessments to identify cost-effective ways to invest in energy efficiency, helping reduce energy bills and increase competitiveness.
	This scheme is intended to promote the uptake of cost-effective energy efficiency measures by requiring all large enterprises in the UK to undertake energy efficiency audits by December 2015 and every four years thereafter.
	The scheme is the Government’s approach to meeting the requirements of article 8 of the EU energy efficiency directive (2012/27/EU).
	In developing this consultation document, officials in my Department have worked closely with colleagues across Government and with industry experts. Our proposals aim to provide for a proportionate and better regulation approach, with the objective of yielding net benefits for the UK as a result of additional energy saving.
	I will place copies of the consultation in the Libraries of both Houses. Copies are also available online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/energy-savings-opportunity-scheme.
	The consultation will close on 3 October 2013. The Government intend to bring forward secondary legislation in spring 2014 setting out the legal framework for the operation of the scheme, so that the UK can meet the 5 June 2014 EU deadline for transposition of the energy efficiency directive.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

Alleged Offences (Diplomatic Immunity)

William Hague: In 2012, a total of 12 serious offences allegedly committed by people entitled to diplomatic immunity in the United Kingdom were drawn to the attention of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office by Diplomatic Protection Group of the Metropolitan Police. Ten of these were driving-related. This is one serious offence less than 2011. We define serious offences as those which could, in certain circumstances, carry a penalty of 12 months imprisonment or more. Also included are drink-driving and driving without insurance.
	Some 22,500 people are entitled to diplomatic immunity in the United Kingdom and the majority of diplomats abide by UK law. The number of alleged serious crimes committed by members of the diplomatic community is proportionately low.
	Under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961, those entitled to immunity are expected to obey the law. The FCO does not tolerate foreign diplomats breaking the law.
	We take all allegations of illegal activity seriously. When instances of alleged criminal conduct are brought to our attention by the police, we ask the relevant foreign Government to waive diplomatic immunity where appropriate. For the most serious offences, we seek the immediate withdrawal of the diplomat.
	Alleged offences reported to the FCO in 2012 are listed below.
	
		
			 Driving without insurance  
			 Mongolia 1 
			 Panama 1 
			 Saudi Arabia 1 
			 Guatemala 1 
			   
			 Driving under the influence of drink  
			 Russia 3 
			 Sri Lanka 1 
			 Equatorial Guinea 1 
			 Uzbekistan 1 
			   
			 Abuse of a domestic worker  
			 Bangladesh 1 
			   
			 Actual bodily harm  
			 Tanzania 1 
		
	
	Figures for previous years are available in my written statement to the House on 5 July 2012, Official Report, column 67WS.

Government Wine Cellar

Mark Simmonds: I have today placed a copy of the annual statement on the Government wine cellar for the financial year 2012-13 in the Libraries of both Houses.
	Following the outcome of the review of the Government hospitality wine cellar, this second annual statement meets our commitment that there would be annual statements to Parliament on the use of the wine cellar, covering consumption, stock purchases, costs, and value for money. The wine cellar is now self-funding through the sale of some high-value stock and payments made by other Government Departments to Government hospitality.
	The report notes that:
	Sales of stock at auction amounted to £63,300, an increase in revenue from sales of nearly 50% from 11-12;
	Further funds from other Government Departments added £22,129 to the overall receipts (over 100% increase cf. 11-12);
	Purchases amounted to £45,866 (cf. £48,955 in 11-12);
	For the first time ever the highest consumption level by volume was of English wine, at 49% of the total.

Diplomatic Missions/International Organisations (Congestion Charge/Fines)

William Hague: The value of unpaid congestion charge debt incurred by diplomatic missions and international organisations in London since its introduction in February 2003 until 31 December 2012 as advised by Transport for London was £67,597,055. The table below shows those diplomatic missions and international organisations with outstanding fines of £100,000 or more.
	
		
			 Country Number of Fines Total Outstanding 
			 Embassy of the United States of America 63,349 £7,277,400 
			 Embassy of the Russian Federation 42,310 £4,899,900 
			 Embassy of Japan 42,206 £4,856,280 
			 High Commission of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 33,552 £3,816,990 
			 Embassy of the Federal Republic of Germany 32,848 £3,782,170 
			 Office of the High Commissioner for India 23,636 £2,777,440 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Poland 19,564 £2,288,280 
			 Office of the High Commissioner for Ghana 18,247 £2,131,520 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Sudan 18,135 £2,017,980 
			 Kenya High Commission 14,226 £1,603,120 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Kazakhstan 13,051 £1,539,800 
			 Embassy of Spain 12,810 £1,500,500 
			 Embassy of France 12,793 £1,476,580 
			 Embassy of Romania 10,726 £1,244,620 
			 Embassy of Greece 10,619 £1,240,295 
			 Embassy of Ukraine 10,507 £1,219,680 
			 High Commission of the United Republic of Tanzania 10,819 £1,205,380 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Korea 8,983 £1,062,900 
			 High Commission for the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 8,611 £1,023,170 
			 South African High Commission 8,852 £999,340 
			 People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria 7,996 £896,780 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Cuba 7,365 £867,160 
			 Sierra Leone High Commission 7,811 £863,980 
			 Embassy of Hungary 6,618 £769,120 
			 Embassy of the People’s Republic of China 6,453 £762,580 
			 High Commission for the Republic of Cyprus 6,326 £741,880 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Bulgaria 5,988 £684,820 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Yemen 5,566 £643,620 
			 High Commission for the Republic of Zambia 5,463 £622,880 
		
	
	
		
			 Embassy of the Slovak Republic 5,015 £580,620 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Belarus 5,015 £580,020 
			 High Commission for the Republic of Cameroon 4,407 £497,660 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Zimbabwe 3,951 £428,660 
			 Embassy of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia 3,769 £420,480 
			 High Commission of the Republic of Malawi 3,471 £394,280 
			 Botswana High Commission 3,385 £393,780 
			 High Commission for the Republic of Namibia 3,535 £392,140 
			 Kingdom of Swaziland High Commission 3,526 £390,200 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea 3,355 £380,400 
			 Embassy of the Czech Republic 3,264 £374,960 
			 Embassy of Austria 3,188 £372,620 
			 High Commission for the Republic of Mozambique 3,278 £370,260 
			 Mauritius High Commission 3,151 £357,480 
			 Embassy of Belgium 2,718 £316,580 
			 High Commission of the Kingdom of Lesotho 2,780 £310,580 
			 Malta High Commission 2,661 £308,280 
			 Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan 2,560 £302,140 
			 Royal Danish Embassy 2,474 £291,080 
			 Uganda High Commission 2,505 £287,360 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire 2,582 £286,000 
			 Embassy of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam 2,475 £283,100 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Lithuania 2,230 £263,560 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Liberia 2,099 £244,060 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Guinea 2,108 £231,280 
			 Jamaican High Commission 1,910 £218,000 
			 Embassy of the Arab Republic of Egypt 1,976 £201,260 
			 Embassy of Portugal 1,527 £182,520 
			 Embassy of Finland 1,519 £176,480 
			 Embassy of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea 1,594 £174,840 
			 Embassy of Luxembourg 1,453 £169,880 
			 Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia 1,583 £169,610 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Latvia 1,323 £152,600 
			 High Commission for Antigua & Barbuda 1,213 £139,200 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Turkey 1,267 £136,820 
			 Embassy of the Democratic Republic of the Congo 1,125 £132,740 
		
	
	
		
			 Embassy of the Republic of Slovenia 1,050 £125,340 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Estonia 855 £102,060 
			 Embassy of the Dominican Republic 874 £101,560

Diplomatic Missions/International Organisations (Unpaid Parking Fines)

William Hague: In 2012 there were 6,154 parking fines incurred by diplomatic missions and international organisations in the United Kingdom which were brought to our attention by local councils. These totalled £584,772.
	The Foreign and Commonwealth Office has held meetings with a number of missions about outstanding parking fine debt. In addition, in April this year we wrote to the diplomatic missions and international organisations concerned giving them the opportunity to either pay their outstanding fines or to appeal against them if they considered that the fines had been issued incorrectly.
	Subsequent payments as advised by councils—including amounts waived by them—totalled £240,035. There remains a total of £344,737 in unpaid fines for 2012.
	The table below details those diplomatic missions and international organisations which have outstanding fines of £1000 or more, as of 27 June 2013.
	
		
			 Diplomatic Mission/International Organisation Amount of Outstanding Fines accrued in 2012 (excluding congestion charge)£ 
			 High Commission for the Federal Republic of Nigeria 84645 
			 Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia 24005 
			 Embassy of France 14735 
			 Embassy of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea 12975 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Uzbekistan 12400 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire 10030 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Liberia 7955 
			 Embassy of the United Arab Emirates 7535 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Iraq 7335 
			 Embassy of the State of Qatar 6745 
			 Kenya High Commission 6480 
			 High Commission for the Republic of Zambia 6385 
			 Embassy of Romania 6010 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Kazakhstan 5510 
			 Embassy of Ukraine 4865 
			 Embassy of Tunisia 4662 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Angola 3870 
			 High Commission for the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 3770 
		
	
	
		
			 Embassy of the Arab Republic of Egypt 3580 
			 Embassy of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan 3565 
			 Embassy of the People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria 3560 
			 Embassy of the Republic of the Sudan 3520 
			 Embassy of the Russian Federation 3380 
			 Embassy of the People’s Republic of China 3280 
			 Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan 3175 
			 Embassy of the Sultanate of Oman 3165 
			 Office of the High Commissioner for Ghana 3140 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea 3105 
			 Malaysian High Commission 3075 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Turkey 3025 
			 Embassy of Georgia 2500 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Bulgaria 2455 
			 Sierra Leone High Commission 2425 
			 Embassy of the Federal Republic of Germany 2215 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Guinea 2185 
			 Brunei Darussalam High Commission 2170 
			 High Commission of the United Republic of Tanzania 2040 
			 High Commission of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh 1910 
			 Mauritius High Commission 1905 
			 Office of the High Commissioner for India 1700 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Indonesia 1700 
			 High Commission for the Republic of Mozambique 1700 
			 Embassy of the Kingdom of Morocco 1690 
			 Embassy of the State of Kuwait 1680 
			 Embassy of the United States of America 1555 
			 Embassy of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela 1510 
			 Embassy of Japan 1495 
			 Embassy of the Gabonese Republic 1490 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Latvia 1465 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Moldova 1425 
			 High Commission of the Republic of Malawi 1335 
			 Botswana High Commission 1275 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Yemen 1245 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Lithuania 1220 
		
	
	
		
			 South African High Commission 1160 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Azerbaijan 1145 
			 Embassy of Spain 1125 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Tajikistan 1115

Diplomatic Missions (National Non-domestic Rates)

William Hague: The majority of diplomatic missions in the United Kingdom pay the national non-domestic rates (NNDR) requested from them. Diplomatic missions are obliged to pay only 6% of the total NNDR value of their offices. This represents payment for specific services such as street cleaning and street lighting.
	Representations by protocol directorate to missions in 2013 led to the settlement of outstanding debts by Kuwait, Namibia, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Slovak Republic, Zambia and Zimbabwe—among others.
	As at 14 June 2013, the total amount of outstanding NNDR payments as advised by the Valuation Office Agency is £674,110, an increase of almost 20% from the 2011 figure (£566,009). A total of £45,219 of this outstanding debt is owed by Iran and Syria which are not currently represented in the UK. We are therefore unable to pursue these debts. Six missions are responsible for almost two thirds of the remainder. We shall continue to urge those with NNDR debt to pay their dues.
	Missions listed below owed over £10,000 in respect of NNDR.
	
		
			 Embassy of the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire £97,987 
			 Embassy of the People’s Republic of China £97,377 
			 High Commission for the People’s Republic of Bangladesh £91,496 
			 Sierra Leone High Commission £55,060 
			 High Commission for the Republic of Cameroon £46,538 
			 Embassy of the Republic of the Sudan £36,566 
			 Embassy of Ukraine £22,941 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Liberia £20,433 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Lithuania £18,985 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Zimbabwe £14,314 
			 International Organisation for Migration £14,305 
			 High Commission of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka £13,189 
			 Embassy of the Republic of Albania £12,799 
			 Embassy of Italy £12,299

HOME DEPARTMENT

Independent Police Complaints Commission

Damian Green: I am pleased to announce that today my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary and my hon. Friend the Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury are publishing the annual report of the Independent Police Complaints
	Commission (IPCC). Copies of the report have been laid before the House and will be available in the Vote Office.
	This is the ninth annual report from the IPCC. The report covers the work of the IPCC during 2012-13 and includes a section on the discharge of its responsibilities in respect of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs.

Independent Safeguarding Authority

Jeremy Browne: The 2012-13 annual report and accounts for the Independent Safeguarding Authority for the eight-month period up to 30 November 2012 is being laid before the House today and published on: www.gov.uk. Copies will be available in the Vote Office.

Firearms (England and Wales)

Damian Green: My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary is today publishing the statistics on police use of firearms in England and Wales for the period 1 April 2011 to 31 March 2012. These show that:
	The number of police operations in which firearms were authorised was 12,550 - a decrease of 946 (7.5%) on the previous year.
	The number of authorised firearms officers (AFOs) was 6,756—an increase of 103 (1.5%) officers overall on the previous year.
	The number of operations involving armed response vehicles was 14,261—a decrease of 2,513 (17.6%) on the previous year.
	The police discharged a conventional firearm in five incidents (up from four incidents in 2010-11).
	Full details are set out in the following tables:
	
		
			 Table 1 – Number of Operations in which Firearms were Authorised 
			  Table 1 
			  2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 
			 AVON & SOMERSET 262 311 333 247 285 328 339 267 250 193 
			 BEDFORDSHIRE 301 442 475 575 663 1,217 1,229 869 1,047 783 
			 CAMBRIDGESHIRE 57 104 241 201 207 316 460 490 402 347 
			 CHESHIRE 451 397 358 367 340 317 269 314 244 226 
			 CLEVELAND 170 453 530 657 293 577 667 430 581 489 
			 CITY OF LONDON 131 364 404 323 239 365 63 38 64 64 
			 CUMBRIA 77 72 152 112 92 92 86 80 109 67 
			 DERBYSHIRE 401 369 287 305 223 211 310 198 179 190 
			 DEVON & CORNWALL 96 112 71 84 80 143 170 185 189 163 
			 DORSET 193 231 223 263 354 258 369 351 242 194 
			 DURHAM 83 156 144 291 340 206 181 140 205 202 
			 ESSEX 312 275 296 432 245 529 529 444 384 402 
			 GLOUCESTERSHIRE 185 127 176 229 280 162 132 175 133 160 
			 GTR MANCHESTER 518 507 461 478 481 497 524 415 360 414 
			 HAMPSHIRE 162 208 237 289 352 382 362 292 360 487 
			 HERTFORDSHIRE 172 195 185 187 280 303 343 205 334 247 
			 HUMBERSIDE 187 183 206 362 235 209 123 133 166 99 
			 KENT 137 207 163 219 170 202 280 275 213 168 
			 LANCASHIRE 238 318 241 240 410 388 281 245 169 113 
			 LEICESTERSHIRE 268 295 260 363 334 318 347 280 196 217 
			 LINCOLNSHIRE 392 386 294 220 157 158 133 73 97 134 
			 MERSEYSIDE 628 751 733 669 727 829 556 701 663 708 
			 METROPOLITAN(1) 3,199 3,563 2,964 4,711 3,878 4,948 2,029 1,971 1,661 1,303 
			 NORFOLK 200 178 195 175 153 174 274 192 252 219 
			 NORTHAMPTONSHIRE 138 148 158 137 156 159 120 109 129 182 
			 NORTHUMBRIA 1,275 1,140 977 611 332 229 154 156 167 150 
			 NORTH YORKSHIRE 100 147 185 183 282 329 289 272 228 280 
			 NOTTINGHAMSHIRE 452 459 408 394 289 270 245 194 279 303 
			 SOUTH YORKSHIRE 463 484 546 749 737 628 538 533 434 384 
			 STAFFORDSHIRE 281 255 216 171 250 244 209 183 231 201 
			 SUFFOLK 270 251 153 202 256 193 237 225 227 280 
			 SURREY 247 203 151 222 222 375 479 188 162 141 
			 SUSSEX 204 280 187 190 201 331 331 227 205 247 
			 THAMES VALLEY 167 195 289 427 264 293 344 319 257 326 
			 WARWICKSHIRE 149 164 124 180 162 150 145 129 93 101 
			 WEST MERCIA 91 197 162 122 155 202 171 122 98 114 
			 WEST MIDLANDS 902 1,377 1,264 1,044 1,557 1,063 1,109 933 750 641 
			 WEST YORKSHIRE(2) 604 575 853 1,335 1,245 831 887 737 641 450 
			 WILTSHIRE 58 63 88 139 226 128 158 152 86 87 
			 DYFED POWYS 29 28 51 63 72 155 92 71 91 292 
			 GWENT 37 40 81 94 133 334 152 151 139 197 
		
	
	
		
			 NORTH WALES 259 197 223 350 340 259 185 126 182 186 
			 SOUTH WALES(3) 281 250 236 279 308 293 555 628 597 399 
			 TOTAL 14,827 16,657 15,981 18,891 18,005 19,595 16,456 14,218 13,496 12,550 
		
	
	
		
			 Table 2 – Number of Authorised Firearms Officers (AFOs) 
			  Table 2 
			  2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 
			 AVON & SOMERSET 84 122 118 117 103 123 127 124 129 120 
			 BEDFORDSHIRE 53 58 56 59 57 53 50 54 55 55 
			 CAMBRIDGESHIRE 71 60 60 50 46 49 51 45 46 49 
			 CHESHIRE 89 75 76 73 80 72 88 95 87 80 
			 CLEVELAND 80 95 100 100 105 97 83 72 74 64 
			 CITY OF LONDON 72 86 89 86 45 49 50 51 53 52 
			 CUMBRIA 87 89 90 89 90 97 86 91 92 91 
			 DERBYSHIRE 69 70 74 75 69 61 61 71 65 60 
			 DEVON & CORNWALL 115 132 123 122 132 142 146 157 146 147 
			 DORSET 59 60 64 62 67 71 79 65 62 58 
			 DURHAM 102 97 103 100 102 89 82 81 70 67 
			 ESSEX 184 186 202 205 220 225 223 223 207 202 
			 GLOUCESTERSHIRE 80 82 93 92 94 95 97 108 102 97 
			 GTR MANCHESTER 202 205 187 245 217 250 296 237 227 236 
			 HAMPSHIRE 94 94 92 97 83 85 93 96 87 92 
			 HERTFORDSHIRE 47 50 53 52 49 53 50 46 47 45 
			 HUMBERSIDE 96 96 101 92 83 87 80 77 72 77 
			 KENT 93 90 94 94 98 87 110 103 97 101 
			 LANCASHIRE 129 122 115 123 103 143 105 94 92 95 
			 LEICESTERSHIRE 68 51 53 59 67 64 73 76 71 78 
			 LINCOLNSHIRE 87 78 86 87 75 77 69 60 71 62 
			 MERSEYSIDE 84 94 93 129 139 153 154 141 127 122 
			 METROPOLITAN 1,823 2,060 2,134 2,331 2,584 2,530 2,740 2,856 2,665 2,731 
			 NORFOLK 109 114 125 119 127 114 106 111 112 125 
			 NORTHAMPTONSHIRE 56 52 50 56 59 53 50 55 50 55 
			 NORTHUMBRIA 99 90 93 98 92 96 95 102 96 95 
			 NORTH YORKSHIRE 64 60 56 78 67 67 63 64 72 77 
			 NOTTINGHAMSHIRE 131 138 138 149 146 137 133 91 98 92 
			 SOUTH YORKSHIRE 100 98 122 116 118 106 99 102 86 98 
			 STAFFORDSHIRE 63 67 76 70 82 82 75 85 81 88 
			 SUFFOLK 80 96 88 84 78 74 67 68 79 67 
			 SURREY 48 53 49 51 45 54 54 60 56 54 
			 SUSSEX 141 134 130 129 129 123 123 114 129 129 
			 THAMES VALLEY 180 172 176 180 186 180 180 193 194 199 
			 WARWICKSHIRE 51 46 53 55 59 63 66 76 60 62 
			 WEST MERCIA 131 139 141 152 133 163 137 115 132 134 
			 WEST MIDLANDS 110 124 134 145 175 177 165 180 167 156 
			 WEST YORKSHIRE 132 140 130 150 148 147 135 156 140 156 
			 WILTSHIRE 78 80 74 72 69 67 74 69 65 70 
			 DYFED POWYS 62 58 79 68 72 67 63 64 72 79 
			 GWENT 60 71 74 86 64 63 54 61 59 59 
			 NORTH WALES 75 73 65 57 56 57 53 76 57 80 
			 SOUTH WALES 125 139 134 130 115 138 121 114 104 100 
			 TOTAL 5,763 6,096 6,243 6,584 6,728 6,780 6,906 6,979 6,653 6,756 
		
	
	
		
			 Number of Operations Involving Armed Response Vehicles (ARVs) 
			 Table 3 
			  2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 
			 AVON & SOMERSET 215 249 312 167 192 292 231 137 135 146 
			 BEDFORDSHIRE 269 414 419 534 639 1,171 1,188 819 991 739 
			 CAMBRIDGESHIRE 45 155 172 160 172 221 366 393 307 256 
			 CHESHIRE(4) 337 356 773 807 793 642 221  244 226 
			 CLEVELAND(5) 63 86 154 285 290 554 661 426 481  
			 CITY OF LONDON 131 364 275 234 183 200 63 32 63 64 
		
	
	
		
			 CUMBRIA 45 65 134 90 72 74 56 51 75 50 
			 DERBYSHIRE 363 312 254 257 183 187 252 169 141 152 
			 DEVON & CORNWALL 32 94 54 54 76 120 138 168 174 154 
			 DORSET 180 215 195 246 322 238 347 349 200 148 
			 DURHAM 66 96 91 256 204 192 164 140 204 193 
			 ESSEX 176 138 138 155 224 226 391 273 187 277 
			 GLOUCESTERSHIRE 166 109 121 145 213 147 120 100 78 104 
			 GTR MANCHESTER 406 440 364 306 214 196 460 292 288 290 
			 HAMPSHIRE 108 128 167 178 270 271 247 194 312 427 
			 HERTFORDSHIRE 129 157 155 160 226 262 311 182 286 206 
			 HUMBERSIDE 170 158 184 335 232 183 94 111 115 85 
			 KENT 132 193 124 183 373 364 325 227 203 134 
			 LANCASHIRE 185 273 228 232 383 313 279 239 166 109 
			 LEICESTERSHIRE 232 269 232 328 313 268 332 263 180 209 
			 LINCOLNSHIRE 367 355 276 210 147 153 128 63 89 124 
			 MERSEYSIDE 547 687 677 611 644 734 445 631 491 584 
			 METROPOLITAN(6) 2,447 2,423 2,322 2,572 2,770 2,303 7,374 7,295 6,009 4,696 
			 NORFOLK 186 169 163 149 133 165 252 176 217 183 
			 NORTHAMPTONSHIRE 90 99 89 101 119 127 117 88 104 159 
			 NORTHUMBRIA 1,204 1,063 893 585 299 199 129 134 112 103 
			 NORTH YORKSHIRE 67 110 144 208 268 318 287 267 210 265 
			 NOTTINGHAMSHIRE 397 404 336 342 256 246 197 175 220 239 
			 SOUTH YORKSHIRE 280 322 438 632 522 493 387 325 307 259 
			 STAFFORDSHIRE 241 212 183 154 222 231 192 155 224 153 
			 SUFFOLK 160 194 119 149 204 148 206 189 166 207 
			 SURREY 240 190 140 204 209 380 469 174 155 137 
			 SUSSEX 171 250 163 162 165 311 248 177 175 108 
			 THAMES VALLEY 167 179 265 355 227 254 292 272 225 291 
			 WARWICKSHIRE 31 138 102 144 121 113 100 92 73 71 
			 WEST MERCIA 111 241 152 94 120 121 128 148 93 108 
			 WEST MIDLANDS 592 975 952 745 518 716 739 689 597 451 
			 WEST YORKSHIRE(7) 565 543 656 1,040 1,060 645 634 450 412 347 
			 WILTSHIRE 39 28 54 124 190 359 499 120 49 61 
			 DYFED POWYS 29 28 48 55 72 135 80 59 71 199 
			 GWENT 16 23 74 85 109 257 138 147 131 101 
			 NORTH WALES 198 153 180 299 295 221 156 107 165 166 
			 SOUTH WALES(8) 253 161 165 223 283 222 485 570 1,649 1,280 
			 TOTAL 11,848 13,218 13,137 14,355 14,527 14,972 19,928 17,068 16,774 14,261 
		
	
	
		
			 Table 4 – Number of Incidents where Conventional Firearms were Discharged 
			 Year 
			  2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11(9) 2011/12 
			 INCIDENTS 10 4 5 9 3 7 5 6 4 5 
			 % OF INCIDENTS COMPARED WITH NUMBER OF AUTHORISED OPERATIONS 0.067 0.024 0.031 0.048 0.017 0.036 0.030 0.042 0.030 0.040 
		
	
	Source: Association of Chief Police Officers
	(Does not include discharges for animal destruction or during police training)
	Notes for tables:
	(1)Revised figures supplied for 2008/09 to 2011/12 by Metropolitan Police Service.
	(2)Revised figures supplied for 2006/7 to 2011/12 by West Yorkshire Police.
	(3)Revised figures supplied for 2010/11 by South Wales Police.
	(4)Cheshire did not record ARV operations for 2009/10.
	(5)Cleveland did not record ARV operations for 2011/12.
	(6)Revised figures supplied for 2011/12 by Metropolitan Police Service.
	(7)Revised figures supplied for 2006/7 to 2011/12 by West Yorkshire Police.
	(8)Revised figures supplied for 2010/11 to 2011/12 by South Wales Police.
	(9)Revised firearms discharge figure for 2010/11.
	Source: Home Office Public Order Unit, based on information aggregated from figures provided by individual police forces as part of the Home Office Annual Data
	Requirement. This was followed by a further quality assurance process involving the Home Office asking individual forces to verify and sign off their figures.
	The information provided is a regular annual update of figures previously published and available on the Home Office website here:
	http://tna.europarchive.org/20100419081706/http:/www.police.homeoffice.gov.uk/operational-policing/firearms/index.html.
	Home Office guidance to forces for providing these figures is contained within the booklet “Annual Data Requirement, Police Personnel and Performance Data, Notes for Guidance”. For the purpose of this statistical return AFOs are deemed to be deployed when
	“they are required to conduct a specific task during which their possession of a firearm (with appropriate authorisation) is a required element” [Chapter 3, paragraph 3.1 A.CPO Manual of Guidance on Police Use of Firearms].
	In addition to the total number of operations, a further sub-category is required regarding those operations where the initial or sole response is by Armed Response Vehicle (ARV).
	Each incident will be classed as only one operation regardless of the number of personnel/deployments or tactics employed to deal with the incident.
	Deployments also include those incidents where AFOs “self-authorise”.
	The number of officers authorised to use firearms is at 31 March 2012.

JUSTICE

Determinate and Indeterminate Sentences and Recalled Prisoners

Chris Grayling: I have written to Sir David Calvert-Smith, chairman of the Parole Board for England and Wales, advising him that it is our intention to withdraw the Secretary of State’s directions to the Parole Board in respect of the release of determinate sentence, indeterminate sentence and recalled prisoners. The directions in respect of Parole Board recommendations on the transfer of indeterminate sentence prisoners to open conditions will remain in force.
	The Parole Board has the important responsibility of determining whether some of the most dangerous prisoners in the criminal justice system can be safely released back into the community. We have recently enacted legislation in the form of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders (LASPO) Act 2012 which contains a clear and consistent statutory release test that the board must apply in making those decisions—that is, the board must not direct a prisoner’s release unless their detention is no longer necessary for the protection of the public. The LASPO Act applies this “public protection” test to all cases which come before the board and also provides a power for the Secretary of State to amend the test by order. In view of this, I consider that it is no longer necessary or appropriate for the directions to remain in place.
	In its original incarnation, the board was an advisory body which made recommendations to the Secretary of State who was responsible for the final decisions on
	release. It was in this context that the power for the Secretary of State to issue directions to the board was established. Since then, however, the board has evolved into an independent decision-making body. I believe that it is more appropriate, therefore, for the board to set its own guidance in relation to the application of the statutory release test that Parliament has put in place.
	We are, therefore, withdrawing the existing directions in favour of the Parole Board applying its own guidance. The board issued guidance for its members in November 2012 which sets out how the statutory release test in the LASPO Act is to be applied. In addition, the board has produced guidance which lists the factors to be taken into account by panels when considering whether to release different categories of prisoner. This list largely reflects the same factors set out in the Secretary of State’s directions, so in practical terms the withdrawal of the directions will not materially change how the board approaches its release decisions. I should like to emphasise that the protection of the public will remain at the heart of every release decision made by the board.
	Copies of the Parole Board’s guidance have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

TRANSPORT

Dartford/Thurrock River Crossing (Fees)

Stephen Hammond: On 5 November 2012 the Highways Agency published detailed proposals to introduce post-payment and enforcement measures that would support the introduction of “free-flow” charging at the crossing. To support this change simultaneously the Department published detailed proposals to provide fair and effective enforcement of free-flow road user charging in accordance with the Transport Act 2000. Both consultations ran for a period of 12 weeks, and closed on 28 January 2013.
	The Dartford crossing is vital to the local and national economy and introducing a free-flow charging arrangement will reduce congestion and improve journeys for the thousands of motorists and businesses who use the crossing every day. Following careful consideration of all the points made during both consultations I am today announcing the Department’s and Highways Agency’s conclusions and the intended actions.
	The majority of respondents were supportive of the proposals to enable enforcement against drivers who do not pay a road-user charge. We are now able to take forward the legislation to make sure charges will be able to be effectively enforced when free-flow charging is introduced at the crossing next year.
	Subject to the completion of the necessary parliamentary processes, the Department intends to implement the road-user charging scheme regulations and the agency will implement the new Dartford/Thurrock river crossing charging scheme order.
	The full response to the agency’s charging scheme order consultation can be found on the Highways Agency’s website, and the Department’s response to the enforcement regulations consultation can be found on the Department
	for Transport’s pages of the Gov.uk website. Both these documents have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Motoring Services Strategy

Stephen Hammond: I am pleased to announce today the next phase of the project to explore establishing a new commercial model for the Vehicle Certification Agency (VCA).
	Departments have been challenged to think about how they commission and deliver services with a view to looking at innovative options. We have looked at the VCA business model and have tested a range of options that would enable the business to grow and contribute to the wider UK economy while continuing to deliver its statutory functions, providing high-quality and valued services to its customers. We set out this proposition for consultation in the motoring services strategy late last year. The new commercial model should also seek to offer new opportunities to VCA staff, who will be essential to the continued success of the business going forward.
	The Department for Transport is now going to start a market engagement exercise to further test the preferred option of a joint venture with a private sector partner. We expect to make a decision in the autumn on whether to proceed with a formal procurement.

Rail Franchising

Patrick McLoughlin: I am today laying before the House the Government’s response to the Brown review of the rail franchising programme.
	Richard Brown’s review was one of two independent reviews I commissioned following my decision in October last year to cancel the inter-city west coast (ICWC) franchise competition and put the wider franchising programme on hold. His review considered the wider implications for the rail franchising programme of the position reached on the ICWC competition, taking into account the findings and recommendations of the Laidlaw inquiry which had focused on establishing what had gone wrong with the ICWC procurement. The report of the Brown review was laid before the House on 10 January this year.
	The review was a thorough examination of the issues led by a highly respected industry figure. I welcomed its publication and its conclusion that franchising is a fundamentally sound approach to securing the provision of passenger rail services on which so many people rely.
	The review made a number of important detailed recommendations for improving the way franchises are specified, competed for and managed. The Government’s response broadly accepts those recommendations. It records the significant progress we have made over the last six months in implementing them—including restarting the franchise programme, publishing a full revised franchising programme and prior information notice on 26 March and a franchise competition guide on 25 June, and strengthening the capability and governance of the Department’s franchising organisation. We have set out a high-level response to each of the many specific recommendations made—indicating where relevant when and where more detailed information will be provided.
	I am confident that this response and the actions we have already taken provide the industry with the clarity and confidence it needs about the way forward for rail franchising, which remains an integral part of our plans to deliver a better and more efficient railway for passengers and the taxpayer.